Depp/Burton DARK SHADOWS Is In Release!!

Check out this podcast review of the movie

http://thecinementals.org/2012/05/dark-shadows-podcast/

The following has some references to the podcast, so I will classify it as a possible spoiler.

[spoiler]They lost me when they started using words like "betrayed." While I certainly agree with some of these folks' concerns, I disagree with the idea sometimes inferred that the "mythology" of DS is sacrosanct (to the point of close replication, both of story and actors), and the list of deviations from the original cited by these good people as a general point of criticism seemed more an opportunity to rattle off knowledge of the original series (in addition to countless other films and TV shows unrelated to the DS film). That in itself, does not qualify as a strong argument for the asserted weaknesses of the film, though it may illustrate some people's disappointment in it, and is certainly valid in that respect.  The OS is what it is. Five years of borrowed, re-imagined mythology that already existed in another form.  It was unique and wonderful in its retelling. The artists and writers who retold it were themselves unique and wonderful.  So, in my opinion, are those responsible for this new work.

Why is it surprising or even offensive to some people that a 2 hour movie can't go into incredible detail about everyone's favorite storyline or character? Or serve those five years of stories and characters in the same way as the OS? Why do some think it acceptable to speak for all followers of the show (as in the actions of Dr. Hoffman at one point in the script being a big "F-You" to ALL fans - as a fan from the first run, I certainly did not feel - um - violated by the scene in question)?  Does this somehow bolster an argument, or detract from it as a version of an ad populum plea?

For all its flaws, I like the new movie both for what it is and what it represents in terms of reinvigorating interest in this show. The folks on the podcast seemed to agree that in spite of their dislikes and disappointments, interest in the show would be served. That seems a good way to look at it regardless of your impression of the movie.

This film is a separate animal from the OS, just as the OS was a separate animal from its source material. And like the original, this film is not perfect, but it uses elements of the original along with the creative re-envisioning of new actors and a new director. If we must beat it up, let us beat it up on its own merits (pacing, acting, story consistency, effective humor, etc.) not on behalf of the Ghost of 433 West 53rd Street (A ghost that I will always have a special, separate place in my heart for), or -  Howard the Duck. 

PS: Ironically, I know some folks that feel that the two Dan Curtis DS Movies are "wretched" and serve as a "betrayal" to the series.  They are by no means my favorite incarnation of DS (Sorry, Darren, but I still look forward to their release, and seeing your hard work come to fruition!), but they are film, and necessarily a somewhat different vision from a daytime soap. Also, they are proof that DC sought to CHANGE the structure and impact of the OS core mythology as far back as 1970.  I DO respect everyone's personal take on the film - we don't all have to agree to all still love DS! [/spoiler]

Respectfully,

Petofi

...And thanks, Nancy, for posting the podcast.  I may have disagreed with much of what they said, but they were very entertaining!

Petofi

I laughed really hard at the part where Barnabas opened a secret door and Elizabeth said "that's where I keep my macrame". I laughed until I almost cried envisioning that scene occurring in the original series. LOL...

Tonight I've been catching up on a lot of the things I've recorded but didn't get a chance to watch yet, and I discovered that The Insider finally did a segment on DS last night - though it was nothing special - and they almost spent as much time talking about the Vanessa Paradis issue as they did the film. But then, they wouldn't have been true to their tabloidy nature if they had done otherwise. 

On the the other hand, Extra did yet another segment and it was worth seeing as it featured new interviews with Depp, Eva Green and Michelle Pfeiffer. And it will be interesting to see if, as in other weeks, a longer version might surface on their weekend show...

2 days 0 hours 53 minutes 21 seconds since the Depp/Burton Dark Shadows has been in release(ET)!!

Thumbs up... I'm so glad I decided to ignore the queasy feeling I got from the promos and give the movie a chance.  I thought the tone was right-on and was glad to see that the comic relief did not veer into mindless satire.  I LOVED the Maggie/Victoria thing -- the two characters had become so interchangeable when viewed in the larger context of early OS, late OS, and HODS that I found the blending to be a brilliant and cheeky homage.  I enjoyed the rich decor of the Collinwood mansion and how Angelique caused various pieces to spring to life in the final confrontation.

Were there things I didn't like so much?  Yes.  But overall I was delighted by the re-imaginings, nods to the original, and general tone.  I look forward to owning this and hope there will be plenty of extra material on the home release.

My non-DS fan girlfriend and I saw the 12:01 AM showing at Dallas's historic Inwood theatre Friday morning and we both loved it.

Was it everything I wanted it to be? Of course not.

The original series isn't everything it could have been. Nor are the Marilyn Ross novels, the Gold Key comics, the syndicated strips, the original theatrical films, the '91 remake and the comics that were released in its wake, the Pomegranate Press books, the '04 pilot, the Big Finish audio productions, not to mention all the the books, comic or otherwise, that have been released in anticipation of this film. None of these are flawless, some of them downright suck. But I enjoy every one of them, one way or another.

The film isn't nearly as comedic as the previews and disgruntled fans would have us believe. The tone is nicely balanced, the visuals are fantastic, the actors are perfectly cast, the music is wonderful, the plot innovations are delightful... I could go on and on about the things I loved about it, but I don't want to gush.

I'll limit myself to one criticism,  and it's that the movie isn't long enough. Even at a lengthy 1 hour 52 minutes the movie felt fast paced, it never dragged, but there's so much information crammed into the running time that most of the characters and subplots feel  underdeveloped. I couldn't shake the feeling driving home that I had just seen the first installment in a long-running franchise. And I'm overjoyed at that prospect.

I can hardly wait to go see it again, ASAP.

I really hope it isn't the end of the franchise; however, if so I will accept it.  I do think DS would work though on Televising, especially on THE CW.

I have to say about the now INFAMOUS BJ scene, I didn't know Grayson personally; however,the biography suggest to me that she would have thought that was a HOOT!  I could be wrong!

as deeply as i despised the climactic scene i can't consider it a "betrayal" of the OS because you just know if can curtis had had the budget to stage a similar scene on the series he would have. curtis was not "above" anything.

in later years he seemed to develop a sentimentality about the series' "mythology". hence the tone of the 1991 series was more serious and reverent to it than alot of what happened on the OS. no adam and no leviathans. lots of damsels in diaphanous sleepwear and loose curls.

but on the OS he wasn't above and beyond trying just about anything. often to the point where the storylines made absolutely no sense.

i will say that the caroyln "reveal" was not something he would have gone for or approved. curtis liked his heroines unsullied. for me it was the one part of the film i found unforgivable.

One small point about Dr. Hoffman's actions or any of the sexuality that may have been expressed in the film.  Remember when the OS aired, and keep in mind how soap operas evolved over the years.  If DS had been on the air in the 90's or 00's instead of the 60's, I'm pretty sure there would've been a LOT more overt sexuality. There would've had to have been- things have become much more explicit on TV.  Thinking about it that way, I just don't think the film has radically altered anything that the DS characters would've done.  Just my $.02 on the matter. 

Funny thing is, we Depp fans have long joked about the lack of sexuality in Tim Burton's films (at least the ones that Depp is in).  I think that Depp and Green cracked a joke about their high wire act being Burton's "first sex scene".  For me, it was kinda about time    But your mileage may vary!

It's time for Hollywood to understand that people who are 18 don't have that much money or sophistication.  Okay, so a movie like The Avengers has broken records.  It happens.  The bottom line for Hollywood is the almighty buck.  That's understandable.  The 1% need to eat, too (even chateaubriand every day).  But if the over-24 crowd is appreciated and things are marketed towards them, then maybe the 1% can have some Bernaise Sauce on their chateuabriand.  I have no intention of seeing The Avengers.  Neither do any of my friend (most have no concept of what it is). 

I'm not writing to defend the Avengers, just to clarify. I don't think it should be put in the same category as Avatar. The Avengers has a history dating back to WWII with the introduction of Captain America. For me, the Avengers are almost as near and dear to my heart as DS. I collected Marvel comics and waited with bated breath each month for the new "CAP", Iron Man, Hulk (he was not an Avenger when I collected), and many, many others. Like DS these stories continued on and on like a soap opera. We learned in Avengers 57 that the android Vision was created from the burned out body of WWII era Human Torch. DS had multiple Quentins. Marvel had two versions of the Human Torch, one an android, the other a human altered by cosmic rays (see the Fantastic Four).  I believe the Avengers deserves all the success it has achieved. It is the movie that I had wanted to see since I was ten years old and wondered if Thanos would conquer the universe with THE COSMIC CUBE. This little relic made the rounds, like the Hand of Count Pefofi. Doctor Doom wielded it, so did The Red Skull, and many other meglomaniacs. I could go on and on about parallels between Marvel comics and DS. I'm going to defer instead by merely stating that I think the appeal of the film goes back to the generation that first watched DS. Joss Whedon wrote a script that is true to that long and rich history.

Probably not a good sign that 73% of the DS movie audience was from people over 25/27 years of age(?). I guess the Avengers sucked the under 25/27 crowed up. Hopefully it will find the younger audience next week.
http://www.boxoffice.com/statistics/bo_numbers/studio_estimate/2012-05-13

Probably not a good sign that 73% of the DS movie audience was from people over 25/27 years of age(?). I guess the Avengers sucked the under 25/27 crowed up. Hopefully it will find the younger audience next week.
http://www.boxoffice.com/statistics/bo_numbers/studio_estimate/2012-05-13

I hope this motivates TPTB to quickly change their marketing strategy for DS.  The film that was promoted was not the film I saw.  (Thank heavens!)

true,

the film was in the end NOT really a comedy per se.

and certainly not along the lines of something like "love at first bite".

that ad campaign didn't do anybody any favors.

My only teensy tiny nitpick with that is that she's rehearsing introducing herself, starts to say Maggie and then sees a poster that makes her change her name... but what had she said her name was when she answered the ad??  I mean, didn't she have to give a name??

I noticed that as well and thought it rather sloppy, given that Elizabeth was clearly anticipating her arrival.  Ah well, it wouldn't be DS without a few plot holes.   

that was very weird and i noticed it too. don't you have to give a name when you apply for a job? and references? where was she living between her escape from windcliff and collinwood?

speaking of windcliff now it does make sense as to why her hairdo and fashion sense are sort of early 1960's.